Pérdida del sentido de la vida y del trabajo En esta carrera desquiciada, violenta y depredadora que ter-

Their presence in the linguistic landscape of London Road only makes sense in the context of a possible community of readers, while at the same time consciously limiting the replies to these adverts to members of that community.

Discussion

When applying the three fundamentally different perspectives of Bourdieu, Goffman and Boudon as outlined in the methodology to this study, different aspects of the data are highlighted. Seen from Bourdieu's perspective, the power and highest status clearly reside with the English language. However, I think that this perspective may not present the whole picture. While being a useful angle in bilingual communities with conflicting native language communities, I feel it is too broad a brush for the

38

multilingual community of London Road, especially when also considering English as a possible lingua franca between different local language communities.

From Goffman’s perspective, there were no clear delineations of language use according to side of the street or end of the stretch I surveyed. This might change if the area was extended as I saw 3 Polish shops in the distance but there was none on the stretch I studied. However, it may also be the case that no such clear areas exist in Sheffield.

The perspective of Boudon seems to me the most promising in this case. Clearly, a foreign language audience is expected in this area that would make it worth the trouble of putting up bilingual and monolingual non-English sings. The information goes beyond mere translation. Along with the example of Paddy Power and the Chinese job advert this is clear indication of actors in the linguistic landscape making conscious choices concerning the use of language in the public space according to who they wish to address and attract as customers or employees. This may also mean a decision to put up a sign in English if no one specific language community is being targeted.

Generally, the fact that Chinese was the only language other than English to be found on all three types of signs, professional as well as PC print-outs and hand- written personal messages intended for an audience that can actually read them, gives an indication that here is a language community behind the visible language. And the fact that it was also the only language found on all sizes of signs shows that this community is not afraid to visibly display its discourse, and has been established for long enough for permanent signage to have emerged.

Conclusions

The study of the linguistic landscape of London Road yielded meaningful results. It showed that linguistic objects are being used by the community occupying London Road and the adjacent residential areas for two main purposes. One purpose is that of

39

in-group information. Here signs are used in languages other than English to target specific audiences and convey certain information exclusively to the in-group. The other one is the conveyance of a sense of exoticism and authenticity of a product or service. In this case the language use is directed at the out-group. A third possible purpose, this time concerning the use of English, is that of a lingua franca to provide communication directed at the community as a whole, therefore strongly suggesting the diverse ethnic make-up of the area. The fact that no obliteration or defacing of any linguistic objects were found can also be seen as significant, as it suggests a basically peaceful co-existence of minority language groups in and around London Road.

The results of this micro study of an English linguistic landscape show that the method has its value in a majority English-speaking context as well as in those previously studied by others. However, to fully understand what the linguistic landscape can tell us about their respective communities, more research should be undertaken. Other researchers have expanded their understanding of the linguistic landscape to include buildings as well as more dynamic signage such as digital screens, mobile signs, the writing on clothing of and items carried by passers-by, and even spoken discourse (Gorter et al., pp. 3-4), which might provide angles for further research. Sayer expanded his concept of the linguistic landscape into the fourth dimension by adding to his list of signs over several months (Sayer, p. 145), another approach that may be of interest in the future. It might also prove fruitful to expand the research area to include all of London Road or to conduct similar studies into other areas of Sheffield. It would for instance be interesting to see if sign sizes or types vary according to different areas. More research into the communities itself using questionnaires to assess factors like second language use and recent migration patterns might also provide more useful data for comparison than the rather broad brush of the main language census question and explain for instance, why languages were found in the linguistic landscape that do not form part of the linguistic make-up of the city as recorded by the census.

40 Bibliography

2011 Census. QS204EW Main language (detailed), local authorities in England and Wales. In Office for National Statistics,

<http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/index.html> [released 30 January 2013].

Backhaus, Peter (2006). Multilingualism in Tokyo: A look into the linguistic landscape. In Durk Gorter (ed.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism, (pp. 52-64). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Backhaus, Peter (2007). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Bourhis, Richard Y. and Rodrigue Landry (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic variety: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16, 23-49.

Gorter, Durk, Marten, Heiko H. & Mensel, Luk Van. (2006). Introduction: The study of the linguistic landscape as a new approach to multilingualism. In Durk Gorter, Heiko H. Marten & Luk Van Mensel (ed.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism (pp. 1-6). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Gorter, Durk et al. (2012). Studying minority languages in the linguistic landscape. In Durk Gorter et al (eds.), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape, (pp. 1- 15). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Languages Sheffield. About us. In Languages Sheffield, <http://www.languages- sheffield.org.uk/pages/about-us-0> [accessed 22 January 2014].

Languages Sheffield. HoLA Project. In Languages Sheffield <http://www.languages- sheffield.org.uk/pages/hola-project-0> [accessed 22 January 2014].

Languages Sheffield. Sheffield’s languages. In Languages Sheffield

<http://www.languages-sheffield.org.uk/pages/sheffields-languages-0> [accessed 22 January 2014].

Moriarty, Máiréad (2012). Language ideological debates in the linguistic landscape of an Irish tourist town. In Durk Gorter et al. (eds.), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape (pp. 74-88). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Marten, Heiko F. (2012). “Latgalian is not a language”: Linguistic landscapes in eastern Latvia and how they reflect centralist Attitudes. In Durk Gorter et al.

41

(eds.) Minority languages in the linguistic landscape (pp. 19-35). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Sayer, Peter (2010). Using the linguistic landscape as a pedagogical resource. ELT Journal, 64, 143-154.

Sheffield City Council. Map of thriving districts and local centres. [n.p., n.pub.] <https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/dms/scc/management/corporate-

communications/documents/community-life/community-development/Map-of-

Thriving-Districts-and-Local-Centres--PDF-3-07MB-.pdf> [accessed 22

January 2014].

Sheffield Tourist Information Centre, Welcome to Sheffield: Map and mini guide. [n.p., n.pub.]

<http://www.welcometosheffield.co.uk/content/files/437/Welcome-to-Sheffield- map-and-miniguide.pdf> [accessed 22 January 2014].

All pictures were taken by myself. I would like to thank Hailey Lam and Ting Feng for their help with Chinese signs.

42

Tracing the Emergence of Sociolinguistic Variation in L2